Re: [tied] tt/st/ss

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "stlatos" <stlatos@...> wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gąsiorowski <gpiotr@> wrote:
> >
> > Sean Whalen napisał(a):
>
> > > There's no reason to assume a PIE stage of tt>tst.
> > > This would mean that d(h)t>tt already, but Baltic and
> > > Slavic show that devoicing before voiceless stops
> > > hadn't occurred yet (among others); Sanskrit shows
> > > dht>ddh.
> >
> > Why?
> >
> > (1) You can have affrication independently of devoicing, e.g.

-d(H)-t-

> > realised as *-dz(H)-t-
>
> But Iranian has dht>ddh but no loss of s/z between obs.

Actually, since you allow PIE dzH I can't prove that the
intermediate stage contains ddh (assuming you also don't require only
stop+v+H $ stop > stop+v $ stop+v+H but allow fric as well).

I say:

dht
ddh
zdh
zd

Do you say?:

dht
dzht
dzdh
zdh
zd